dhamma follower wrote:I listen to AS because there are conditions for that to happen,

Would you go into that a bit more please? What do you mean the conditions are right? Does that mean that you have saved enough money. You have some free time, You have bought an airplane ticket, flown so many miles, to listen, to converse, with no idea that you will gain anything, that the trip will be of any value? Or do you mean that you have great barami that allows this all to unfold?

This is reading too much into the words. The conditions to listen to AS are not superior or inferior to the conditions for my writing now on Dhamma Wheel. It simply means, everything arises by conditions. One of the main conditions for chanda to listen to AS to arise is because I consider her to be a wise friend in the Dhamma, and associating with an wise friend and listening to his/her explanation on the Dhamma is recommended by the Buddha. But other conditions must be in place for something to happen that we can't enumerate here. The point is to understand that it is not me or my doing, and not mistaking the activity to be actual vipassana bhavana it-self.

And when that moment of understanding arises do you let it pass away

Understanding arises and passes away by its own nature. No one to let it pass away. But if it did happen, it can condition other moments, such as moments of wanting to share that understanding with others. It can be considered by others as right or wrong understanding, it is up to their own accumulations....

beeblebrox wrote:After all that's been said in here, I think it's a good thing that the Buddha made dukkha the entry point for his practice... it's the first noble truth. Without it, the practice of the eightfold path would not even be possible. That includes the right view, its wisdom, and right mindfulness.

Dear BBB,

Discussing the First Noble Truth could be a good topic for a new thread.

dhamma follower wrote: What has been said it's that understanding can not be made to arise at will.

And as has been repeatedly said to you, no one here is claiming that wisdom can be made to arise at will. But what has been pointed out to you at length is that following the Buddha's clear teachings i sthat we can by our actions cultivate by meditation, by sila, by putting into practice the Eightfold Path the conditions that give rise to insight. It is by our actions, our choices that we do this.

. . . it is the panna cetasika it self which is cultivated gradually by its own conditions . . .

The logic of what you are presenting here is that the only way one can become awakened is by first being awakened, and there is not anything one can do about it.

Fortunately, that is not what the Buddha what the taught.

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

In other words, you must choose to act -- proper consideration -- upon what you heard.

What you say here amounts to say you can make wisdom- wise consideration- to arise at will.In reality, no one can choose to have wise consideration. Sometime it happens, other times- more often, it doesn't.It is self view which conceives the "self" who can control in what is only a conditioned dhamma.

Brgds,D.F

Conditions exert force on/control other conditions. It's ridiculous, you're playing semantics. Appropriate attention only arises when one actually strives to look at things in certain terms, according to certain concepts, that they have learned of their own will and put into practice. Eventually appropriate attention results in deep understanding (aka wisdom) but in order for wisdom to arise you first have to deliberately look at things with appropriate attention. Anyway, if you can't accept this then this conversation will go nowhere.

Last edited by polarbear101 on Fri Mar 01, 2013 5:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

"I don't envision a single thing that, when developed & cultivated, leads to such great benefit as the mind. The mind, when developed & cultivated, leads to great benefit."

"I don't envision a single thing that, when undeveloped & uncultivated, brings about such suffering & stress as the mind. The mind, when undeveloped & uncultivated, brings about suffering & stress."

dhamma follower wrote: I listen to AS because there are conditions for that to happen, just like now, I am writing on Dhammawheel, because there are conditions for that.

Yes; you deliberately chose to do so.

Does the word "deliberately" imply there is a self there making the choice? Isn't making choice- cetana also conditioned?

We have already discussed that. I am saying here nothing more and nothing less than what the Buddha said.

In other words, you must choose to act -- proper consideration -- upon what you heard.

What you say here amounts to say you can make wisdom- wise consideration- to arise at will.

Again, this is something that has already been discussed at length, but you insist, because you are conditioned to, no doubt, to keep repeating the Sujin talking points and not really engaging what is being said to you. What one does, in following the teachings of the Buddha as clearly put forth in the suttas, is to cultivate the conditions that give rise to insight.

In reality, no one can choose to have wise consideration.

In reality, according to the Buddha, as he taught in the suttas, one can cultivate the factors that give rise to insight.

It is self view which conceives the "self" who can control in what is only a conditioned dhamma.

Again, you repeat the straw-man argument. No one is positing an unchanging self agent. What I am putting forth is consistent with the Buddha's teachings:

Samyutta Nikaya III 144: "Bhikkhus [monks, the Buddha said, holdinga fleck of dung on his palm], if even if that much of permanent,everlasting, eternal individual selfhood/metaphysical being [attabhava],not inseparable from the idea of change, could be found, then this livingthe holy life could not be taught by me."

The fact that there is no attabhava is what allows for the possibilities of choice in how we act, and how our choices condition our movement towards or away from awakening:

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

Fortunately the Buddha does not agree with your passive approach to awakening:

dhamma follower wrote:I listen to AS because there are conditions for that to happen,

Would you go into that a bit more please? What do you mean the conditions are right? Does that mean that you have saved enough money. You have some free time, You have bought an airplane ticket, flown so many miles, to listen, to converse, with no idea that you will gain anything, that the trip will be of any value? Or do you mean that you have great barami that allows this all to unfold?

This is reading too much into the words.

It is just a series of questions.

dhamma follower wrote:The conditions to listen to AS are not superior or inferior to the conditions for my writing now on Dhamma Wheel. It simply means, everything arises by conditions. One of the main conditions for chanda to listen to AS to arise is because I consider her to be a wise friend in the Dhamma, and associating with an wise friend and listening to his/her explanation on the Dhamma is recommended by the Buddha. But other conditions must be in place for something to happen that we can't enumerate here.

Why can't you enumerate here?

dhamma follower wrote:The point is to understand that it is not me or my doing, and not mistaking the activity to be actual vipassana bhavana it-self.

Mr Man wrote:And when that moment of understanding arises do you let it pass away

Understanding arises and passes away by its own nature. No one to let it pass away.

dhamma follower from my perspective it seems like you are just playing with language here. When you say "to understand" this implies an agent. You are not being consistent

dhamma follower wrote:But if it did happen, it can condition other moments, such as moments of wanting to share that understanding with others.

Which is what you are doing here?

dhamma follower wrote:It can be considered by others as right or wrong understanding, it is up to their own accumulations....

What does this mean? Is accumulations "Barami". Does it mean that if we don't get it there isn't the "Barami" and if we do there is?

dhamma follower from my perspective it seems like there is oodles of conceit here and a good dollop of superstition and as the saying goes "if it quacks like a duck".

beeblebrox wrote:After all that's been said in here, I think it's a good thing that the Buddha made dukkha the entry point for his practice... it's the first noble truth. Without it, the practice of the eightfold path would not even be possible. That includes the right view, its wisdom, and right mindfulness.

Dear BBB,

Discussing the First Noble Truth could be a good topic for a new thread.

Thank you,

Brgds,D.F

Hi Dhamma Follower,

It seems like you missed the point.

I said that it's not possible for the wisdom to arise without dukkha, the first noble truth, in this practice...

I know that the appropriate attention is less likely to arise when there's no interest... but the post was very short. I think it's also a good practice to have the proper attention even with someone who isn't wise (such as me, for example), because then it will be more likely to arise when you have the opportunity to listen to someone who is actually wise...

This is similar to practicing the mindfulness... because then you will have the skill when the wisdom arises.

. . . it is the panna cetasika it self which is cultivated gradually by its own conditions . . . [/quote]The logic of what you are presenting here is that the only way one can become awakened is by first being awakened, and there is not anything one can do about it.

Fortunately, that is not what the Buddha what the taught.[/quote]

Dear Tilt,

The logic here is that without the Buddha, no enlightenment possible. Hearing the Dhamma he taught followed by proper understanding, again and again, that is how the Path is cultivated.

As we know, what is called a person is only rupa, citta and cetasika. Only panna can actually be said to perform the function of "cultivating the path". Whenever panna arises, other wholesome factor such as right concentration, right effort, right thinking arise too.

Cetana (volition), or chanda (wish-to-do) are not factors of the Path. Whether they are wholesome or unwholesome depends on other accompanied mental factors. Similarly, concentration can bi right or wrong, depending on other cetasikas.

So when you maintain that there can be a path out of suffering which should be cultivated, I totally agree. However, chanda or cetana can not lead the show, but it is understanding which does. We might think that now, I have understood, then I will practice. But if you consider that each moment is different, the moment you intend to be mindful is not the moment where there is actually sati-sampajana. Cetana can not condition sati-sampajana to arise, as we have agreed. So actually, it is a previous moment of right understanding which conditions it. And right understanding at the beginning is intellectual, it can later condition the moment of direct understanding when it becomes firm and powerful enough.

When you listen to the Dhamma and have right understanding of how all dhammas are beyond control, it can give rise to many moments of wholesomeness. The emphasis on this impossibility to do something about it might appear to be a passive stance, but actually passive or active do not really apply, because there's no one to be passive or active about the Path, only understanding can make it grow.

You have quoted many of the Buddha's words exhorting people to be steadfast in their quest for deliverance. However, when the Buddha said things like this, IMO, it doesn't mean that now it is volition and effort rather than understanding which lead the path. His words are like reminder which condition a sense of urgency, which can condition other moments of sati-sampajana. All his teachings must be in conformity with each other. That's how I understand different things that are said in different contexts, all provide conditions for wholesome state of mind to arise.

Because talking about conditions such as having time or plane tickets don't accurately describe conditionality. I would prefer to talk about conditionality in terms of elements which condition seeing, hearing etc...or wholesome and unwholesome accumulations, which better explain the anattaness of all phenomena. There are too many of them and when we really break them down, there will be less the idea of someone doing something.

Btw, I didn't intend to make my posts to imply that someone is better than another. If my posts have given you or anyone here that impression, please pardon me. I only try to express my understanding of the Dhamma in ways which might be different from many's, and in doing so, it might sound to be arrogant.

In the end, it is the Dhammic points that I would like to address only.

dhamma follower wrote:Cetana (volition), or chanda (wish-to-do) are not factors of the Path.

dhamma follower wrote:You have quoted many of the Buddha's words exhorting people to be steadfast in their quest for deliverance. However, when the Buddha said things like this, IMO, it doesn't mean that now it is volition and effort rather than understanding which lead the path. His words are like reminder which condition a sense of urgency, which can condition other moments of sati-sampajana.

These are the instructions we have. Your arguments to the contrary, are just that. Contrary.

"And what, monks, is right effort? (i) There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen. (ii) He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the abandonment of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen. (iii) He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen. (iv) He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen: This, monks, is called right effort.

dhamma follower wrote: . . . it is the panna cetasika it self which is cultivated gradually by its own conditions . . .

The logic of what you are presenting here is that the only way one can become awakened is by first being awakened, and there is not anything one can do about it.

Fortunately, that is not what the Buddha what the taught.

Dear Tilt,

The logic here is that without the Buddha, no enlightenment possible. Hearing the Dhamma he taught followed by proper understanding, again and again, that is how the Path is cultivated.

Only partly true. What you are missing, which seriously undermines your position, is that the Buddha outlined a way of putting into practice what he taught. It is not just a matter of repeatedly hearing the Dhamma; rather, it was and is, as been clearly and repeatedly shown using the suttas, a matter of putting into practice, by choice, what the Buddha taught.

As we know, what is called a person is only rupa, citta and cetasika. Only panna can actually be said to perform the function of "cultivating the path". Whenever panna arises, other wholesome factor such as right concentration, right effort, right thinking arise too.

Again, you illustrate the passive path, which is not what the Buddha taught and which essentially argues the nonsensical position the only way you can become awakened is by being awakened and there is not a thing one can choose to do that will facilitate that awakening.

Cetana (volition), or chanda (wish-to-do) are not factors of the Path. Whether they are wholesome or unwholesome depends on other accompanied mental factors. Similarly, concentration can bi right or wrong, depending on other cetasikas.

The suttas point out a very different point of view: A. VI 63: Volition [cetanaa; intention, volition, choice], Monks, is what I call kamma [action], and SN I, 38: This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.

So when you maintain that there can be a path out of suffering which should be cultivated, I totally agree.

Actually, you don't agree. You have just argued, contrary to the suttas, that there is no action/choice, kamma, involved in ones practice.

Cetana can not condition sati-sampajana to arise, as we have agreed.

We have not agreed. What I stated is that by one's actions one can cultivate the conditions for the arising of sati-sampajañña

And right understanding at the beginning is intellectual, it can later condition the moment of direct understanding when it becomes firm and powerful enough.

However, the Buddha taught more than just an intellectual right understanding. He taught a way of putting that right understanding into practice. He certainly did not teach the incredibly passive -- do nothing -- approach you are advocating.

When you listen to the Dhamma and have right understanding of how all dhammas are beyond control, it can give rise to many moments of wholesomeness.

The problem is that, by making dhammas beyond our control, you are reifying dhammas, giving them attabhava. The point of the Buddha's path of practice is that dhammas can be deliberately conditioned by our choices and understandings, which is why the Buddha taught pariyatti/learning and patipatti/practice -- the Eightfold Path of learning the Dhamma, of meditation and of sila as active practices, not just a passive listening.

The emphasis on this impossibility to do something about it might appear to be a passive stance, but actually passive or active do not really apply, because there's no one to be passive or active about the Path, only understanding can make it grow.

The problem is that for you, as has been clearly shown by using the Buddha Word that your position is, thankfully, simply wrong.

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

You have quoted many of the Buddha's words exhorting people to be steadfast in their quest for deliverance.

It is far more than being steadfast in what the Buddha was saying. He was clearly pointing to our actions, our choices, as being of significance in our putting his teachings into practice.

However, when the Buddha said things like this, IMO, it doesn't mean that now it is volition and effort rather than understanding which lead the path.

You opinion simply ignores what the Buddha clearly said: This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38. Understanding is grounded in our actions. Our actions/kamma express and cultivate our understanding.

His words are like reminder which condition a sense of urgency, which can condition other moments of sati-sampajana.

Why do we need a sense of urgency if there is, according to you, nothing we can actually do to actualize the Buddha's teachings?

All his teachings must be in conformity with each other.

Following your point of view, there is no conformity in the Buddha's teachings.

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

dhamma follower wrote:Naturally it is not an activity. Manasikara is a cetasika which arises with all citta, it is usually translated as attention, consideration...It is yoniso manasikara when it accompanies kusala citta, and in the case of vipassana bhavana, it is accompanied by panna. Because it is yoniso, it is free from taints, at the moment it arises.

This accords -- more or less -- with the traditional interpretation, cf. the MA to Sabbásavasutta where yoniso manasikara is identified with sotapattimagga, or the SA to Vipassísutta where it is coupled with an understanding, a penetration into the links of paticcasamuppáda.

I personally think that the Suttas themselves makes this apparent, but it is worth noting regarding yoniso manasikara that Ven. Bodhi finds the traditional interpretation "unsatisfactory" and in his footnote to the Vipassísutta (CDB 729) offers his own understanding of the term, placing yoniso manasikara before paññá and thus at the level of the puthujjana -- which is puzzling given that throughout the Suttas yoniso manasikara is attributed to the ariyasávaka, if not overtly, at least implicitly.

pulga wrote: . . . it is worth noting regarding yoniso manasikara that Ven. Bodhi finds the traditional interpretation "unsatisfactory" and in his footnote to the Vipassísutta (CDB 729) offers his own understanding of the term, placing yoniso manasikara before paññá and thus at the level of the puthujjana -- which is puzzling given that throughout the Suttas yoniso manasikara is attributed to the ariyasávaka, if not overtly, at least implicitly.

It should not be puzzling at all. With out the cultivation of yoniso manasikara how do you think paññá would arise?

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

pulga wrote:throughout the Suttas yoniso manasikara is attributed to the ariyasávaka, if not overtly, at least implicitly.

Hmm... yet the conditions for right view are (1) the voice of another and (2) yoniso manasikara, neh? So how can a puthujjana become a sekha if the requirement to do so is to already be one?

"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]

daverupa wrote:Hmm... yet the conditions for right view are (1) the voice of another and (2) yoniso manasikara, neh? So how can a puthujjana become a sekha if the requirement to do so is to already be one?

I imagine it must be something like one of those pictures that the Gestaltists like to show us, only far, far more subtle and profound. If we don't look at it just right, attend to it properly, we don't see what is represented. But either we see it or we don't. One might brood over a misshapen blob for a lifetime, not giving it "proper attention", but once one does the picture appears.

In any case, this seems to be how the tradition interprets the term: and I think the Suttas support the spirit of that interpretation.

. . . in his footnote to the Vipassísutta (CDB 729) offers his own understanding of the term, placing yoniso manasikara before paññá and thus at the level of the puthujjana -- which is puzzling given that throughout the Suttas yoniso manasikara is attributed to the ariyasávaka, if not overtly, at least implicitly.

Ven Bodhi is quite correct in this.

AN I 4; NDB 91: For one who attends carefully [yoniso manasikara] to the mark of the unattractive, unarisen sensual desire does not arise and arisen sensual desire is abandoned.

AN I 13; NDB 100: Bhikkhus, I do not see even a single thing that so causes unarisen qualities to arise and arisen unwholesome qualities to decline as careful attention [yoniso manasikara].

AN I 15; NDB 102: For one who attends carefully [yoniso manasikara], unarisen factors of enlightenment arise and arisen factors of enlightenment reach fulfillment by development.

AN I 31; NDB 117: For one of careful attention, unarisen right view arises and arisen right view increases.

SN I 105; CDB 197: You to, bhikkhus, by careful attention, by careful right striving, must arrive at unsurpassed liberation, must realize unsurpassed liberation.

SN II 10; CDB 537 [here we clearly see in the whole of this discourse CDB 536-540 that careful attention precedes wisdom]: Then, bhikkhus, through careful attention, there took place in me a breakthrough by wisdom.

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.